Witnessing a new Turkey

The Taksim protests are part of a culture war in reaction to the government’s expanded mandate into people’s personal lives.

Activism matters to the young people of Worcester as I learned from my visit to South High on a recent Thursday afternoon. At the invitation of recent Clark University graduate Gregory McPhee, a teacher at this exceedingly diverse school, I came to speak about my experiences as an activist and scholar of the Armenian Genocide, a topic that remains taboo in my home country of Turkey.

My thoughts on the recent upheaval in Turkey are dedicated to the curious students I met in the auditorium of South High.

Government plans to reconstruct an Ottoman military barracks as a shopping center in Istanbul’s Gezi Park symbolize the clash between old and new in Turkey.

The uprooting of trees not only cleared the park but exposed the sham of Turkish democracy.

I know, because I was in Istanbul between May 29 and June 4. Gathering with the crowds in Taksim Square every morning and evening, I shared their tear gas and heard their complaints.

“Enough!” was the constant refrain of the protesters. They have had enough of Turkey’s primitive political structure and enough of authoritarianism.

Western journalists may interpret the protests as a secularist challenge to the Islamic way of life. But can they explain why, on June 5 in Gezi Park, the Quran was recited in celebration of the Islamist holy day Kandil, or why people abstained from alcohol during this occasion?

The unrest is better explained as a passionate call by a new generation for Turkey to embrace democracy and respect differences.

Removal of trees was the ostensible cause for the demonstrations, but the actual problem is Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan. The prime minister misconstrues the electoral support he enjoys as a license to undermine the rights of citizens and interfere in their private lives. Exceeding the bounds of his office, he interferes in Istanbul’s municipal affairs, meddling in decisions about local mosques and shopping malls.

Erdogan styles himself a patriarch who knows best. And like a domineering father, he solicits opinions but imposes his own decisions.

He hasn’t grasped that democracies, like families, function best when everyone is genuinely involved in decision making. Whether he learns from Taksim isn’t yet clear, but the lesson has cost him dearly.

The Taksim protests are a manifestation of the culture war unfolding in reaction to the government’s expanded mandate into people’s personal lives. Erdogan has been issuing “fetwas” on all kinds of subjects, including how many children women should bear and whether they should have Caesarian births; he limits public displays of affection and alcohol consumption.

Young people want Erdogan out of the bedroom and they have staged an insurrection to stop him from forcing his conservative lifestyle on them.

A new Turkey is rising. And the people gathering in the squares transcend traditional ethnic, religious, and political divides.

A close look at the protesters is enlightening. A survey conducted with 3,000 of these individuals (Istanbul Bilgi University), while limited in scope, provides some insight: 64 percent are under age 30; only 15 percent consider themselves closely allied with a political party; and 54 percent were not previously involved in political activities.

Of the reasons listed for taking part in the protests: 92.4 percent cite the authoritarian behavior of the prime minister; 91 percent cite the violation of democratic rights and the excessive force of the police as a secondary reason; the silence of the media was cited by 84 percent; only 8 percent were directed to get involved by a political group; 84 percent defined themselves as freedom seekers. They want the police to stop the violence (96.7 percent) and they want respect for individual rights (96.1 percent).

These figures demonstrate that the protests have emerged from outside long-standing political, ethnic, and religious identities.

Previous government injustices and bad decisions have been interpreted according to traditional divisions, prompting only affected groups to take to the streets. Gezi Park is different. Trees and parks are powerful symbols and they have inspired Turkey’s first experience with mass civil disobedience. People are united in their demands for democratic rights of assembly and freedom to participate as citizens in their government and community.

These are the footsteps toward a new Turkey. Young people have ushered in a cultural revolution. And if Erdogan ignores them, it is at his peril and at the peril of Turkey’s future.

Just as I was meeting with the South High students, protesters were meeting with Erdogan in Ankara. And while he publicly declared that “he got the message” and agreed to ask for the public’s input into the future of the park, on Saturday evening his government forces abruptly cleared Gezi Park.

One of the students at South High asked what sort of government Turkey has today. I explained that it is a democracy in thrall to authoritarianism. Erdogan has missed the opportunity to demonstrate the promise of true democracy and it will be up to the people of Turkey to hold him accountable.

Taner Akçam, a professor of history at Clark University, is the author of “The Young Turks’ Crime against Humanity: The Armenian Genocide and Ethnic Cleansing in the Ottoman Empire.”